Skip to main content

About this Show

[untitled]

NETWORK

DURATION
00:31:00

RATING

SCANNED IN
San Francisco, CA, USA

SOURCE
Comcast Cable

TUNER
Channel v26

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
ac3

PIXEL WIDTH
528

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

Us 15, Loftus 7, San Francisco 7, Mazzucco 4, Turman 4, Kingsley 3, Debbie Waterfield 2, Add 2, Occ 2, Hicks 2, Israel 1, Porter 1, The California 1, Asterick 1, And City 1, Brown 1, Katie Porter 1, Dejesus 1, Kelley 1, Chan 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  SFGTV    [untitled]  

    December 3, 2013
    3:30 - 4:01am PST  

3:30am
about 12 years old. and she has been a member of the police family and her former husband is a prominent retired san francisco police officers and so we will adjourn if her honor as she has her memorial service and may she rest in peace. commissioners? >> she was also very proactive for the officers for justice. >> and she also made the very best chocolate cake that i have every had in my public life. >> i miss debbie. >> yes. >> and any public comment with reference to line items 3 a, b, c, or d? >> hearing none, public comment is closed call item number four and i am going to turn that over, actually to vice president turman. >> and item four, discussion and possible action to adopt san francisco police commission resolution establishing required submissions and reports and scheduling recurring reports or to take
3:31am
other action. >> thank you, mr. secretary. actually i will be discussing this item along with commissioner kingsley. and in your packets you you have a copy of the resolution, this resolution has been i think that renewing a year and the reason that we have been working on this project and it is geared toward making sure that we understand, and keep track of all of the responsibilities, reports, and requirements, that membership on this commission requires. it also references any and all reports referenced in the administrative code and the charter, or those created by the dgo as well as commission resolution as well. it has been thoroughly vetted and approved by the department,
3:32am
thank you, chief. thank you, deputy chief oko and it has been vetted as well, with the occ. and we have a few other items that we want to amend, based on the last, many comments that i want to thank director hicks for providing and it has been a lot of work by two very competent very dedicated assistant deputy city attorneys, so thank you very much for your assistance on that as well. so, with that, i think that we have discussed the resolution, in detail. and it has received the approval of those who were required to do most of the reporting. we have tried to trim out things that we really could trim out and i think that there are a few items that we just need to cover and then we can
3:33am
take any questions that you may have on it. did you want to cover up the one that... >> yeah, thank you, commissioner turman. on page 6 of the resolution, there is an action item 15, and in speaking with director hiks, regarding this item, subsequent to this hand out being printed and contributed. we would like to include or director hiks proposed this modification. instead of reading as it presently reads there would be a modification, so that it would read, occ director's quarterly report on pending investigations, to be submitted to the commission and board of supervisors, period. and another sentence will be added. for the fourth quarter report, that is the march report in
3:34am
parenthesis may be included in the annual report. and that annual report that is being referred to are in both items 16 and 50. i agree, with director hicks on this, i think that it makes sense. the change that she proposed and think that we ought to go with that. and so that is really the only change. >> 60 and 50? >> 15. the language would just modify 15. >> if you look at exhibit a, if the resolution itself, sort of outlining exactly what our responsibilities are, and it is from the exhibit a and we have
3:35am
done the commission and we have tried to organize it so that the people so that we understand from a challenging perspective which each and every one of these items will arrive during the calendar year and also clearing that with the occ and the departments as well. and ask a question, and now that we have exhibit a and that will be provided to the commission secretary and so the commission secretary will be responsible for insurancing that the items hit the agenda at the appropriate time. >> that is right. >> and i think that it is also worth noting that not everything that appears itemized in the first section, that comes on to the agenda, and not all are at an agenda and but they are just reports that will be included in the packet and other israel ems that go on the consent calendar.
3:36am
>> great. >> and it looks more onerous than it is. this calendaring. >> i have to thank both of you and this is incredible and i know that you both put a lot of time and effort into this and a lot of, you also, public should know that both commissioners kingsley and turman went through the reports that we were doing before and eliminated a lot of things that we have done has been reactionary and that have taken place and there is no longer a need for the reports but some have been merged into the department general orders and so i want to thank you for just really doing a complete, house cleaning and keeping this on track here, this is awesome. >> well, a lot of that credit goes to deputy, sitting attorney, mahony and just katie porter as well. >> great. >> and as well, as, you know, the department representatives in particular, and department chief, tony olka and the director hiks, and i will put a great deal of effort into this too and so many thanks to them
3:37am
as well. >> oh,, thank you. >> is there any questions from other commissioners? >> commissioner loftus, you are first. >> thank you, president mazzucco. >> this is just a tremendous body of work and i being here with the commissioner i am so grateful that there is a framework that we are actually required to do, given the number of lawyers that we have on the commission and we like to follow the rules and we hold the other people to follow the rules and we should know what the rules are that we are accountable. thank you for that and it will be help follow for me to know what reports we took off. in large part because, one of the things having been in government, but now being outside in government and outside of government in the non-profit is that the one piece that you guys probably already fought through and i am not benefiting from the analysis is what the utility is because i think that there are a number of reports that are
3:38am
require and when i look at the calendar and i am overwhelmed by, what looks like we are sufficiently calendared for the entire year, on the things in the past and one of the things in the law enforcement and the police issue ss leaving enough space for us to react to the issues reacting in time and making sure that we are looking in the forward and not just in the past, at the california, department of justice and one of the issues that i know that brown did is look at all of the statutory required report and say did someone actually use this or did it go into a box? and so, for me, it would be great if you guys could talk about that or give a sense of what we called and, if we have any sense of whether this is just on the list that is required to an admin code or whether we really identified that there is something who use its and it is valuable information and because i know that i feel for myself that there is always information that i want from the department and i feel like recognizing the resources and that i want to make sure that they have room
3:39am
to be responsible to this commission. and just keeping up what was in the past. >> thank you, commissioner loftus, for your comments. and you are right, that is one of the reasons why, we started to work on this and created this resolution, is because, we really did not have the enormous number of reports that were coming in to us and want to take a look and see what are we required to do and what we have committed through the condition and through the resolution and so we have sorted through all of that and there are some items of this charter and ago, and that we can't do anything about that more than just list it at this point, because there are requirements in terms of the commissioner resolutions, and they are included in here, i believe that most all of them
3:40am
are, and if there is something and i think that the productive part of this discussion will be what items on here that are commissioned resolution, requirements, that you know, you would think that maybe you no longer had to do it and we could, we could reduce and we did as much as we could without flying in the face of these requirements and we did not believe as to the commissioners that we did not take the prerogative to it. >> to take anything off that was created by the resolution and it is up to the whole commission to make that decision. and we thought that we needed to get a full picture, you know, first and so there is something on the resolution that you would like to take off? >> i think that is a longer conversation, because i think that i could probably, i would... i feel myself that i
3:41am
need more information about some of these reports because for instance, what we could do is if the members of this commission did analysis about the reports and even if the admin code had a you facility utility and we can say that these reports do not have utility but they take a significant amount of the resource and would like to clear up those and i am sure that the board of supervisors have other issues that they might want and so i would guess that we could go through as questions for the line item and on some of these, or, my thought would be on if any fellow commissioners weigh in because i could be in the minority on this. and that, i don't know that i have enough information to make a determination of whether or not all of these reports, i am a little hesitant to approve a resolution that says that all of these reports are required. >> while all of these reports as of right now are required. >> i understand that, but are also talking about...
3:42am
>> but if you want, another process in which we start to eliminate the reports i think that is useful as well. that is not this process. >> got it. >> this is just getting us in line of where we are today and i am more than glad to have that conversation about okay, let's take this out and we don't need this and need this. and that is a sponsor with the board of supervisors and any other kinds of admin and that is a decision that could be made as well. and what we have before us, and a stream lining and effect and it may be stream lining and we really mean the timing and combining at a certain period of time so that we can get it done, the most efficient way and that is what is required as of right now. >> okay. >> and yeah, i guess the part that i was referring to was the fact that there is a resolution, makes me think that there is some action to the folks just organizing what is already required of us and i
3:43am
think that is the distinction and the fact that we are superceding to the resolution with anything else and this supercedes that, and that gives me the impression that it was important to take the action and if that was interpreted as further validating the need for all of these reports that is where i would take issue, it might be that there are two separate processes. >> loftus, you are saying that this does call for a second look, so to speak each year, annually, and so if there are things that come up throughout the year that are presented or not presented in terms of regular reports, these citations for the requirements are listed here and you know, you can, follow this, and you know, throughout the next year as this is put into action. and then, do some cooling out a year from now. and that could be in tandum
3:44am
with a couple of commissioners looking at this in terms of analyzing it in more depth as you are suggesting. >> but a number of these say illegal requirement as well. a number of the things that are on here says that there is an illegal requirement. yes and those items other than the budget that have been organized in a different way and they mirror more of what is happening with the fire commission and that is where miss porter you have got kind of that model but, that is true, and there is some items that are on here that are due to practice, that essentially, we have always been doing it or, you know, and so we have included it in here. and probably you noticed that as well. and so,
3:45am
>> i appreciate the work. and i find it very, very useful to have all of this together and organized by, it looks like you have it organized by general subject area, the budget and the capitol budget and you also have it organized by the month and the year and i find it extremely good to have it in one place and the question that i had was similar to commissioner loftus was there any reports or anything was eliminated if they were not, that is fine, that is just organizing what we already have and does not change anything and it just makes it more clear for all of us, and that makes a lot of sense to me. and it is a reminder of the responsibilities that we have as a commission to over see all of this and there is a lot of aspects in the department to look over, you know, even on the consent calendar and i appreciate everything that goes on before us and to discuss them and it is good to have it on the perspective here and then the last question was that
3:46am
i just had about the appendix b. and excuse me, exhibit b, and i was just trying to follow what this was for? >> and it does, that is a little, that is an oddty and those two requirements really only come up one every ten years and even though they don't come on the calendar annually and it is putting it in a separate exhibit, seem to clarify it. and so it can either remain as an exhibit, b, or we could put it with a notation, under exhibit a, and in the months of december and just make a notation, that is essentially after ten years. >> i think that the notation would be a great idea that way that you have it all, i love how clean this is, and terms of having it in one calendar if you are okay with moving that. >> absolutely, and city attorney and i talk about that and just decide for the clarity
3:47am
at this meeting and that it can be condensed. >> perhaps a date would be good here. >> >> and that makes a lot of sense to me, thank you. >> thank you. >> and dr. marshal >> and not to prolong this discussion, but again, i want to thank you for obviously for organizing this in the systematic manner but commissioner loftus just to add to what you are saying, and saying these names, and i can remember when a lot of these things like the king resolution and the sparks and you know, i guess that the best way to say it is that we seem to add and never subtract and i think that it is a good point and that i am not necessary, but i remember when the commissioners felt that they were, at this point, necessary, will you we seem to continue to add, add,
3:48am
add, and then we will say maybe this is not necessary, now, and so i think that after what this has done, and someone is willing to tackle and say do we really still need to have this? >> because we are going to continue to have it and going to get big and her bigger that is a good point to make and thank you for doing this, but i do think that at some point do we need to do this and as we did in the past? and at this particular report? and the way that it is done. good comment. >> thank you for your comments, commissioner. >> commissioner loftus? >> i guess that i would just say that the part that i have the question about is the resolution aspect of this and because to the commissioner mar shl's point, the point that i am making i feel that as a commissioner myself i without knowing, and i know that, it seems strange to adopt a resolution that requires us to follow the requirements already required of us. right? so, if it is required of us, then the question is, we have got a list of things that are
3:49am
required of us and i would be interested in a process to look at whether we want to take action and still have that be required of us over the next year, but the thing that i am hesitant to is to take a pro-active vote to again, say, yes, these are what are required of us and we are going to pursuant to this authority, we adopted these requirement because for me i feel like i don't have enough information and it is already required of us and it is already required of us and me to take a action without some more. >> i have the same question. do we, we don't have to take action on something that we are already doing. >> exactly. >> but you do not have to take a vote on it. i mean, because that is... the discussion is for the action and but this is just going, and it is not really a resolution, this is just the document presented to us so that the secretary can get organized and you know, when these things will come about and help me with that because i was confused about that myself. >> and well, we are not adding
3:50am
anything too. >> but we are, and we are organizing it around a calendar, >> okay. >> of the year and making sure that we put in place a process in which we are doing the things which we are required to do as of right now. and later if you want to change those things, i think that is... >> so this is more of a calendaring and agendaizing document than it is... >> and that is the spirit of the resolution. >> okay. >> and i would like to move, that we adopt this resolution. and with the changes that we just discussed in >> yes, thank you, with the two changes that were introduced one to item 15 and the other adding, moving the exhibit b integrating it into exhibit a. >> second. >> favor? >> i have the public comment, any public comment regarding this resolution? >> yes? >> good evening, commissioners, sorry i am an analyst and...
3:51am
and there are a few things, very good points, and commissioner loftus, and totally agree, and i am kind of, i agree with adding the date or the next year that these ten-year reports are due, and can add it to this with asterick at the bottom and there are no resolutions attached and it is not organized by organization, you know, what is sfpd need to report on, what is the occ need to report on what does the commission need to provide and in putting it on the calendar is great for the hearings but for the public it is, you know, when i go to the occ website, i look for say policy changes,
3:52am
and i see that there is a gap of i think, 2008 was the last time that the policies were posted. and then in the chief's report, there is some, items that are pending that are not updated in the following report or you kind of have to reconcile and it is hard to do the math so to speak. so just before adopting another point, adopting a resolution and things that are required, and these are all required and for making the reports in the back up the charter and the board of supervisors requests, and things that the reports and those reports and to kind of match that to the reports in the data so that you have a better idea of what they are all but to the public, it is, you know, it is just something
3:53am
to consider before you can move to resolve this next week, once everything has been matched up and the purpose of the reports are put there. i mean it is a lot of work, i dig it and it is a lot of detail. but adopting something without having verified it. and i think is probably, not the best practice, >> thank you for your comments. just to address that, it would be a binder, about like that, you know to put everything together. but, i heard that you are technological and most of the charter can be found on the internet and the city attorney has, you know, gone through by the way to see the attorneys and all of the background.
3:54am
>> and right, i have a copy of that report and the various requests from the police to here to there and i have had to root around and they are not obvious, and this was knots posted on the website and so the public did not have access to this and kind of to verify and not to have the input on it and could have been prepared but it is great to hear and it is a great start and just let the board of supervisors require, you know, going in there annual reports from each, you know, and thank you, thank you. >> thank you, do we have any further public comment, and the public comment is now closed. do we have a vote? >> yeah, we do. >> first and a second. and all in favor? >> aye. >> and it actually passes thank you very much. >> no you have to ask for any nos? >> yes, no. >> no. >> do we have a no? >> we have one no. >> roll call please? >> president mazzucco.
3:55am
>> aye. >> vice president turman? >> aye. >> commissioner marshal? >> aye. >> commissioner dejesus is excused. >> commissioner chan? >> aye. >> commissioner kingsley? >> aye. >> and commissioner loftus? >> no. >> the motion passes, 5-1. >> thank you, please call the next line item. >> purchase su ant to all manners containing to item 7 below, closed session, including public comment on the vote to whether to hold item seven in closed session. >> this is public comment regarding our closed session, matters which are litigation matters, and disciplinary matters which are protected by confidentty and it is now closed and call item 6.
3:56am
>> vote on whether to hold item 7 in closed session, including whether to assert the attorney klie ant privilege in regard to item 7, a, b, c, and d and the san francisco administrative code, section 67.10 action. >> thank you, do i have a motion? >> i move. >> and we go to closed session. >> all if favor? >> aye. >> and thank you very much and we are moving to the closed session, thank you. >> president mazzucco we are back in the open session and you have an open quorum. >> thank you very much and could you call the next line item. >> line item 8 vote to elect to hold or disclose any or all discussion on item 7 held in closed session. >> the san francisco cold section, 671.2 a. action. >> i move not to disclose. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> thank you, please call the
3:57am
last line item, number nine, the adjournment. >> adjournment, line item nine. >> and thank you very much and as i stated earlier tonight, the police, commission i move to adjourn in the honor of former san francisco district attorney investigator debbie waterfield who passed away recently, she was a very pro-active member of the officers for justice. and prior to joining the san francisco district attorney office, and the da investigator she was a san francisco sheriff's deputy. and she has had affiliations with the police department and some of us on this commission for many, many years, and miss debbie and i was there when she married kelley water field my dad's old partner and i have known him for a long time and she is great, when you told her that it was your wife's birthday she had no problem driving you to nordstromto make sure that you got the right gift. >> i just want to echo,
3:58am
commissioner mazzucco comments, debbie was very good to many new district attorneys and very kind hearted person and she will be greatly missed. so, condolence to her family, and just glad that i got to know her. >> commissioners, i move that we adjourn in honor of retired inspector debbie waterfield. >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> thank you. >>
3:59am
4:00am